An LLM wrote a flight simulator in a language an LLM also wrote for you.
It's cool that you're doing all of this, and hopefully you and others get value out of it.
But it helps to be clear about who is doing what.
Just own it.
It's cool that AI can do this.
Anyway doesn’t matter. I’m just kind of whining, I probably should’ve never written that comment in the first place. I think it just sticks out to me unlike like a lot of common parlance in other industries, which can definitely steer into anthropomorphizing, because we’re seeing all kinds of issues with people attributing actual intelligence to these things or just experiencing general psychological distress because of them. Using language that ascribes human characteristics to describe using LLMs just feels weird in that context
The behavior/attribute overlap isn't a coincidence or misunderstanding, it is by design.
In case of "ask", that describes our behavior not the machines.
But if a machine is able to recall and use some fact fluently then it makes sense to say it "knows" it. We routinely use words like "know", without any confusion, when talking about simpler lifeforms that are far less human-like than these models.
None of the above means the machine feels pain, is conscious, has a continuous identity, etc. Yet.
For me, a DIY programming language is something I wouldn’t have the time for without the help of AI.
- conventional aircraft have direct roll control, not just pitch and yaw
- you can get very far with simple static lift and drag coefficients (though they're not static IRL), and then computing lift/drag forces, and using trigonometry with the bank/pitch/yaw angle to implement a simple rigid body dynamics model
Those two alone will have a big impact on how realistic it feels to fly.
Like someone else said in this thread, it's cool that AI can do this, but... meh?